Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

paul · 09-06-2012, 12:25 PM

OK, so here's where I am. As an orthodox Christian, I have no problem ideologically differentiating between elect and reprobate. I don't particularly care how you want to identify the two groups or how you put people there, but they both exist. (If you disagree so far, feel free to {politely} explain why and share. I'm curious but it probably will not answer my question.)

Given those distinctions, I can come to a logical conclusion (albeit a somewhat cold-hearted one) that God's wrath is appropriately on the reprobate while His blessing is on the elect. What I have a much more difficult time dealing with is the "bad" that happens to believers. I've not heard a decent argument about this yet. At least not one that can stand some scrutiny.

I know a while back there was a thread on Job and what the heck was going on there. It was a bit of a different perspective and didn't answer the question I'm asking, but, I think it is related in some way.

So, I put it to you, why do bad things happen to believers? (Oh, and to clarify, I'm not asking about the consequences of stupid choices. I'm talking about bad things that happen that aren't traced back to poor decisions or to sow-reap type stuff.)

Don · (This post was last modified: 09-06-2012 12:43 PM by Don.)

Let me see if I can rephrase what you are asking:
Are you, in fact, asking "Why do bad things happen to good people?"

That seems to be the question at hand. So then we have to ask for a definition of what constitutes "good" people.
Who is "good?"

It also begs the question: "Is there something inherently special about believers that renders them immune from calamity, hardship, tribulation and evil?"

Finally, let's look at the most well known example in history of "evil" being brought against a truely innocent, righteous and "good" person: the Son of God. Why did he have to face such evil? Was he delivered from the bitter cup he faced or did he suffer through it?

So then, finally we have to ask, "Is the student greater than the master?"

Klasie Kraalogies · 09-06-2012, 12:52 PM

In a general way, I think that the objection to bad things happening to good people is a belief that being "good" is about earning a reward. This confuses the method parents, schools etc often use to encourage kids to learn behaving, or students to study, with the object of behaving, learning. I'm not sure if I'm clear here.

In theology particularly, it stems from the idea that "being saved" is the same as "being blessed" (here, in this life). This is not true in Christianity (or Buddhism for that matter). It has more in common with ancient polytheistic paganism, where obedience to the gods were rewarded.

greg · 09-06-2012, 01:00 PM

Completely disagree with your first paragraph, but will respond to the crux of your question: Why do bad things happen to Chrisians/God's elect?

Very simple! This is a sin-cursed world that is "groaning" waiting for Christ's appearance. Also Satan is the temporary landlord here. (the prince of the air)

captain_solo · 09-06-2012, 01:09 PM

(09-06-2012 01:00 PM)greg Wrote: Completely disagree with your first paragraph, but will respond to the crux of your question: Why do bad things happen to Chrisians/God's elect?

Very simple! This is a sin-cursed world that is "groaning" waiting for Christ's appearance. Also Satan is the temporary landlord here. (the prince of the air)

So God can't/won't stop what Satan does here? For bonus points you could answer the question "who cursed the world for its sin"?

I think you are answering the wrong question.

greg · 09-06-2012, 01:16 PM

(09-06-2012 01:09 PM)captain_solo Wrote:
(09-06-2012 01:00 PM)greg Wrote: Completely disagree with your first paragraph, but will respond to the crux of your question: Why do bad things happen to Chrisians/God's elect?

Very simple! This is a sin-cursed world that is "groaning" waiting for Christ's appearance. Also Satan is the temporary landlord here. (the prince of the air)

So God can't/won't stop what Satan does here? For bonus points you could answer the question "who cursed the world for its sin"?

I think you are answering the wrong question.

Wait a second I thought Paul was asking the question. Why don't you try and answer HIS question! We are waiting with bated breath!

paul · 09-06-2012, 01:50 PM

(Meetings and planning sessions going on, if I don't respond right away, that is why. I will be checking back daily (weekdays) to reply as often as I can.)

(09-06-2012 12:38 PM)Don Wrote: Let me see if I can rephrase what you are asking:
Are you, in fact, asking "Why do bad things happen to good people?"

That seems to be the question at hand. So then we have to ask for a definition of what constitutes "good" people.
Who is "good?"

Yes, in essence, that is the question. And by "good", I mean those to whom the substitutionary death of Christ and the perfect, active obedience of Christ (to the Law) have been imputed. Those are the ones I am including in the group, "the elect". By all reasoning, their sins are paid for (past, present, future) and God says of them (as He said of Christ), "This is my beloved son (daughter) in whom I am well pleased".

Quote:It also begs the question: "Is there something inherently special about believers that renders them immune from calamity, hardship, tribulation and evil?"

I would say yes. Based on the above information defining "good". I mean, obviously it doesn't, but that is the question. Why? I understand that the reprobate are under God's wrath. I understand that sowing and reaping exist. Let me stab at the question another way. What I'm not following is, why is mercy not omnipresent? (For example, why does a child suffer abuse? Why does a "safe" driver get hit by a drunk?)

Quote:Finally, let's look at the most well known example in history of "evil" being brought against a truely innocent, righteous and "good" person: the Son of God. Why did he have to face such evil? Was he delivered from the bitter cup he faced or did he suffer through it?

So then, finally we have to ask, "Is the student greater than the master?"

Christ suffered for my sin so that I didn't have to. His suffering was a real and tangible result of the sin of the world (or the elect, but I'm not really wanting to discuss the extent of the atonement right now). If God chose not to save any of us (as is His right), then Christ would never have had to suffer. I can't buy that my suffering (or the suffering as I described above, which I don't always qualify for)... I can't buy that it is simply a following in the example of Christ. At least not buy that as the final answer to Why?

paul · 09-06-2012, 03:37 PM

(09-06-2012 12:52 PM)Klasie Kraalogies Wrote: In a general way, I think that the objection to bad things happening to good people is a belief that being "good" is about earning a reward. This confuses the method parents, schools etc often use to encourage kids to learn behaving, or students to study, with the object of behaving, learning. I'm not sure if I'm clear here.

In theology particularly, it stems from the idea that "being saved" is the same as "being blessed" (here, in this life). This is not true in Christianity (or Buddhism for that matter). It has more in common with ancient polytheistic paganism, where obedience to the gods were rewarded.

Oh no. I guess I would have done better to include a definition of "GOOD" in my initial post. I'm not talking about reward at all. I mean, I get the message of Christ when He talks about the people the wall fell on. The idea that we all deserve bad (eternal damnation) and don't get it is an example of God's mercy. I get that.

No, I'm not talking about earned blessing. I'm just trying to figure out why God allows bad things to happen to His chosen people.

paul · 09-06-2012, 03:44 PM

(09-06-2012 01:00 PM)greg Wrote: Completely disagree with your first paragraph, but will respond to the crux of your question:

I kinda figured you would. But regardless of how folks get into the two categories, those are the two that they are in. Sheep/Goats, Believers/Unbelievers, Elect/Reprobate, Saved/Unsaved, Righteous/Unrighteous, "Enter In"/"Depart". I'm not wanting to debate how one moves from one category to another, just trying to clarify that I wasn't talking about the judgement on the unsaved.

And thanks for being gracious enough to overlook the difference of opinion. I really wasn't trying to "bait" the non-Calvinists. Wink

Quote:Why do bad things happen to Chrisians/God's elect?

Very simple! This is a sin-cursed world that is "groaning" waiting for Christ's appearance. Also Satan is the temporary landlord here. (the prince of the air)

I "groan" with the world. But why is it that way. Maybe another way to ask the question is why did God choose to take "time" to redeem the world and not do so in an instant.

And Satan's rule here (Job/Ephesians) is still governed by God. I'm sure that Satan is responsible for much of the evil that happens, but I'm just not understanding why God allows such behavior.

captain_solo · 09-06-2012, 04:49 PM

(09-06-2012 03:44 PM)paul Wrote:
(09-06-2012 01:00 PM)greg Wrote: Completely disagree with your first paragraph, but will respond to the crux of your question:

I kinda figured you would. But regardless of how folks get into the two categories, those are the two that they are in. Sheep/Goats, Believers/Unbelievers, Elect/Reprobate, Saved/Unsaved, Righteous/Unrighteous, "Enter In"/"Depart". I'm not wanting to debate how one moves from one category to another, just trying to clarify that I wasn't talking about the judgement on the unsaved.

And thanks for being gracious enough to overlook the difference of opinion. I really wasn't trying to "bait" the non-Calvinists.

Quote:Why do bad things happen to Chrisians/God's elect?

Very simple! This is a sin-cursed world that is "groaning" waiting for Christ's appearance. Also Satan is the temporary landlord here. (the prince of the air)

I "groan" with the world. But why is it that way. Maybe another way to ask the question is why did God choose to take "time" to redeem the world and not do so in an instant.

And Satan's rule here (Job/Ephesians) is still governed by God. I'm sure that Satan is responsible for much of the evil that happens, but I'm just not understanding why God allows such behavior.

The possible answer to why no immediate redemption:
"In the same way, even though God has the right to show his anger and his power, he is very patient with those on whom his anger falls, who are destined for destruction. He does this to make the riches of his glory shine even brighter on those to whom he shows mercy, who were prepared in advance for glory." -Romans 9:22-23

As to the first question, the same chapter makes it clear that God's decisions regarding the lives of Jacob and Esau, who he determined his relationship with before they ever made a conscious act of good or evil are his alone to make.

I don't think the original question is one that can be answered to the satisfaction of human intellect. Its THE question though. We have to very clearly define terms or we won't understand the question anyway. I got on greg because his answer revealed theolgical bias, and the slope to process theology (God can't or won't interfere) is a steep one.

God chooses to show mercy to those he will show mercy to, that rests in his will, not in anything we do. The logical extension of that is that even in the life after regeneration, our paths are shaped and set by God and his desire for our good (defined as those things which will demonstrate and proclaim His glory through us most effectively from His perspective) These things are not always "good" in human terms if by that we mean, happy, comfortable, successful, easy. Christians are not promised the High Life, in fact quite the opposite is clearly the case. I wouldn't even go as far as to say that those who are outside God's grace in the sense of salvation are responsible for the evil that befalls them (when you describe Acts of God essentially, not as you said, things that result directly from sin) The question is a fine one to ask, but we have to ask it in the right way.

Maybe some more later, here is a quote from Greg Koukl

Quote:British philosopher Bertrand Russell said that no one can sit at the bedside of a dying child and still believe in God. My response to Mr. Russell is, "What would you say to a dying child?" What could an atheist say? "Too bad"? "Tough luck"? "Bum deal"? You see, in that circumstance, there's no possibility of redemption for that evil. In fact, it doesn't seem to make sense to even call it evil at all if there is no God.

But with God, at least there's the possibility that the evil can be used for good. That's the promise of the Scriptures.

And so, instead of the syllogism, "God created all things, and evil is a thing, therefore God created evil," we start from a different point. "All things God created are good-which is what the text says-and evil isn't good, therefore God didn't create evil." Then we can progress to, "If God created all things, and God didn't create evil, then evil is not a thing."

You see, those two syllogisms are just as valid as the first one (if God created all things, and evil is a thing, then God created evil), and it seems that the premises are more reliable. The premises seem to be accurate and true.

The questions we have to ask ourselves are: Do we have reason to think that God is good, and do we have reason to think that evil is not a thing? If we have good reasons to think those two things, then our new set of syllogisms work.

We can then strongly trust that when God does allow a privation of good (evil) to influence our lives, He does it not for evil designs, but ultimately for good purposes.

http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5093